EXHIBIT
2-B
FACT
SHEET TEMPLATE FOR WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES—
MPWMD
Special Workshop, August 25, 2011
Alternative
Type: AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR)
–example--
Project
Name: WATER PROJECT 1, SANTA MARGARITA
WELLS #1 AND #2
Project Sponsors: MPWMD and California American Water
Location: 1910 General Jim Moore Blvd, Seaside (near
Eucalyptus) – map on reverse side
Project
Description: Divert and treat excess flow from
Carmel River in wet season to inject in Seaside Groundwater Basin for later
recovery in dry season
ATTRIBUTE |
ESTIMATES |
NOTES and COMMENTS
Cite
documentation; identify unknowns |
YIELD
(AFY) |
|
|
*Avg./long-term |
_____ AFY |
|
*Minimum |
_____ AFY |
Note if weather dependent |
*Maximum |
_____ AFY |
Can project be easily scaled up? |
|
|
|
COST |
|
|
*Capital
Cost |
$_____ |
|
*O&M |
$_____ |
|
*Unit
Cost |
$/AF _____ |
Note financing assumptions and
expected life |
|
|
|
TIMELINE |
Start = 9/1/2011 |
Some tasks can be concurrent |
*CEQA/NEPA |
Years ____ |
Note lead agencies |
*Approvals/Permits |
Years ____ |
|
*Site
Acquisition |
Years ____ |
Note current landowners |
*Design |
Years ____ |
|
*Construction |
Years ____ |
|
*Water
Delivery |
Year _____ |
|
|
|
|
PERMITS
AND APPROVALS |
Law Examples |
Agency Examples |
*Federal
Agencies |
NEPA, ESA, 404, 401 |
Ex: USFWS, NMFS, Corps, EPA, Sanctuary |
*State
Agencies |
Water Rights, 1601 |
Ex: SWRCB, RWQCB, CDFG, CCC, CDPH |
*Regional
Agencies |
Air Quality |
Ex: TAMC, MBUAPCD |
*Local
Jurisdictions |
Wells, use permit |
Ex: County (Health and Planning),
cities |
|
|
|
PROS
AND CONS |
|
Highlight primary factors |
*Benefits |
Cheap, proven |
Ex: proven technology and success
locally |
*Drawbacks |
Impacted by weather |
Ex: could be zero yield in drought
year |
|
|
|
OTHER |
|
|
U:\staff\word\committees\WaterSupply\2011\20110811\02\item2_exh2b.docx